this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
87 points (97.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43336 readers
843 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Alright so I'm not an expert so I might not be explaining it correctly.

Federated Network: Multiple instances sharing content, such as Lemmy

Peer to Peer Network: There is no "instances", just peers. Many peers sharing content. Every user is a peer. There is no server costs, because every device connected to the network is acting like a mini-server. It will cost your device some storage space and network bandwith depending on the how the software is designed.

Or do you think Centralized servers are still gonna dominate the future?

top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think federated networks are the present

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The gift that was given?

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem with peer to peer is that it would require you to have stuff saved on your device and my sister can’t even keep her phone “empty enough” with 256GB so I think local “hubs” is the better right now.

Isn’t it essentially similar to the dark net that has been going like that successfully since forever ?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

With distributed hash tables it is manageable. You do something like "store three copies on three peers" and as long as one of them is online the post is accessible. This is actually better than the way lemmy does it now. In principle each lemmy server stores the posts from its communities, and a copy of each post from communities its users are subscribed to. But since all instances are federated so well, in practice each of the 1000 lemmy instances stores a copy of almost every post ever made. That's like 100GB x1000. With a DHT, the amount of space used on each user's device is on average the amount of posts one user makes x3, no more.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Yeah I have serious concerns about how it will scale.

Luckily storage is the cheapest thing generally.

Maybe down the line they can start using varying degrees of cold storage for older content. Cheaper to store but more expansive to access.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Storage is cheap but most of the instance operators that are setting up right now aren't prepared for how much storage they're going to need and it's associate costs. I'm not talking the big boys like .World, but the hundreds of private and semi-private instances being set up on $12/mo VPS and such.

After 30 days of running my single user instance I'm at 23GB of storage. Since I'm using on prem equipment I have the lowest cost per GB possible and am not the least concerned. We're going to see a ton of attrition with hosted instances as the costs of ownership goes from 10, to 20, to 40, to $50+/mo. due to storage. Many aren't in anyway prepared to tackle the topic of moving PICTRS off to object storage or engage in other mitigations.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not worried. Text is tiny to store and any image posted remains on the source instance and is not duplicated, just linked.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We could also just delete stuff after some time. Nobody really needs the 1000th repost of a meme from 20 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

If they’re storing it right, it is content addressed, meaning that their servers are aware of duplicates because each file is hashed.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Look at the Zerotier vpn model. They have several instances hosted all over the world that the client app running on user devices initially contact. These instances are in essence federated even if they use a different term for it.

The instance then gives each client a list of peers and how to reach them, and the clients attempt to reach each other directly, bypassing the instance where possible.

Both models work together. There's no need for locking into one and ignoring the other. Use the best tool for the job at hand.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Federation for big communities, p2p for friend and misc local affinity groups.

I just wish more people knew about Manyverse, especially activist circles

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

All three in combination will be the future

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

agree, this is not a "hit 2 birds with 1 stone" situation

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

In my opinion federation is the better peer to peer / decentralized service. Power is not centralized, but everything can be run as efficiently as a centralized service.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pure P2P doesn't scale well, especially for content which is generated by a few, and watched by many.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

BitTorrent didn't get the memo apparently.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are plenty of dead torrents with no seeders. What happens when the post you want to see has no seeders? Most people don’t keep their device on 24/7 and how many people access on a mobile device whose OS doesn’t support this kind of access?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

This is a diametrically opposite problem from what the parent comment was talking about. They were saying that P2P is bad at sharing new popular content from one user to many, which is patently false. You are worried about old content that hasn't been accessed in years and decades disappearing. This is a real question to think about.

Right now reddit and twitter bear the burden of maintaining access to entirety of old content. Reddit even has a system to "archive" posts older than 6 months to make storing them on server easier. In a decentralized network, no one user has that responsibility. What can be done about it? Maybe we need to reconsider our idea of "permanence", tone down our expectations that all content will be accessible forever, even if no one accesses it. Maybe a censorship-free P2P network would need some sort of sunset system anyway, because otherwise it will fill up with useless spam (the same way Usenet was made useless because it became 1% posts and 99% binaries). Maybe data hoarder enthusiasts will run archive nodes with much larger storage dedicated to preserving old post history. Maybe you can add a filecoin-like system to your P2P network, where you pay $0.01 to guarantee that your comment remains online for 10 years, $0.02 for 20 years, etc. Not recommending it, just saying there are options.

Do note that neither reddit nor lemmy are immune to such bitrot. If reddit goes bankrupt and shuts down servers tomorrow, all that content will be gone as well. Maybe archive.org will manage to save a snapshot, maybe pushshift.io will have a backcopy, but what about all the posts made since pushshift API access was revoked? They'd be gone. As lemmy instances go in and out of existence over the years, what happens if this instance and the ones that got a federated copy of this post all go offline? This post will be gone from history as well. Its continued existence can only be guaranteed if users on the new instances years in the future go back and view it here again before it disappears.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I think centralized will be dominant. Centralized systems get the best efficiency which gives a better return to capitalists.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I don’t understand the concept of peer to peer in this scenario. Isn’t lemmy essentially peer to peer?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Bit torrenting is an example of peer to peer. Blockchain theoretically works this way too.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, each user is a “peer”, in Lemmy they access content through the instances.

They are talking something more like IPFS.

I don’t really know much about IPFS, but I think a downside to peer to peer is the potential for content to disappear because someone turns off their computer or quits whatever application. I can’t be the only person to have a torrent stall at 80% because the rest isn’t available in the network.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I think this article by Alyssa Rosenzweig is important to consider. I think it does make some assumptions about the purpose of federating, but it does make one very important point that I think everyone in this space is ignoring: the internet was already fundamentally federated from the beginning, and look how that turned out.

It's for this reason that I believe a fediverse only survives due to a culture of keeping it alive, but I don't know that that culture will survive long term in a free market. It might be that the internet is just like the rest of the world: an ebb and flow of democratic and totalitarian states, history being forgotten, lessons being relearned the hard way. That might just be how the internet works now.

load more comments
view more: next ›